Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You know, just 10 short years ago whenever someone had a problem with an AMD chip, the overwhelming response from the tech community was "dude, just get an Intel. They are way better."

So pardon me, but from a lifelong AMD enthusiast, you all deserve this...

"Hey guys, why are you still running Intel? That shit is like 2 generations behind my AMD in performance and reliability."

Damn, that felt good.




Reliability? It isn't a car, it doesn't wear out.

Also why would you be a life long enthusiast of a specific company? Why not buy what works best at any point in time?


It does wear out. As a general rule everything with moving parts can wear out, and a CPU is full of moving electrons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration

It takes on the order of 100 years for well made modern CPUs to fail due to these effects, but poorly made CPUs could fail far earlier. There are likely some nonzero number of failures attributable to electromigration.

There are some people who buy overclockable parts and don't overclock them because they are more robust. It's unknown exactly how or why CPUs fail. Taking them apart to check is an extremely expensive endeavor. But sometimes they do.


So processors wear out but it takes longer than a lifetime and longer than any processor has exited for it to happen?

Where is the evidence that AMD is more 'more reliable' than Intel?


Also, the chip obviously doesn't need to wear out to become less preformant over time. Reliability is perhaps the wrong word, I think quality would suit better.

But in any case, if you have one chip that decreases in performance 10% per year due to security mitigations and another chip that remains consistently performant, it is something to consider when shopping.


> But in any case, if you have one chip that decreases in performance 10% per year due to security mitigations

Why would this be true?


Because security mitigations contained in micro code updates regularly impact performance.

I mean, no offense, but that is literally the focus of this article and this discussion.


This is a one time thing, where are you getting a pattern from?

You hallucinated 10% a year from a single incident and called it "reliability".


Because Wintel has always displayed bad sportsmanship and anti competitive practices. I don't want a winner who wins because they cheat.

Also, AMD almost lost everything. At one point they had to sell their own HQ and lease it back to generate cashflow and keep the doors open.

If they had closed, Intel research budgets would tank. They wouldn't have nearly as much incentive to innovate. Without Dodge motor company you would still be driving a Ford Model T in black.

If AMD died instead of making the original Athlon, you would still be stuck with a Pentium MMX because Intel could have stopped innovating and kept their market share.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: